Talk:Lund Cathedral

Legend of Lund Cathedral, Finn the Giant and St Lawrence
I came across this legend about the building of Lund Cathedral:

A Finnegans Wake Gazetteer: "LUND. City, SW Swed[en]. The mythological builder of L[und] Cath[edral] was the giant, Finn MacCool, at the request of St Lawrence. If the saint did not guess the builder's name by the time the ch[urch] was built, Finn would get his eyes. Lawrence guessed it as the last stone was put in place."

Third Census of Finnegans Wake: "Lund — the cathedral in Lund was built by Finn MacCool (q.v.) at the request of St Laurence. If the saint did not guess Finn's name by the time the church was built, Finn would get the saint's eyes. As the last brick was put in place, St Laurence guessed right. Finn tried to pull the church down, but was changed into a stone (q.v.) and stands there to this day."

I am guessing that the Finn in this legend is a Norse Finn and is not actually the Irish mythical figure Finn MacCool.

The legend is real. As a resident of Lund I can confirm this. I have never in my life heard of him having a last name, however. 83.254.36.208 07:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this is a locally well-known legend that's been around for hundreds of years - in 1818 Esaias Tegnér, a classic of Swedish romantic poetry (and a resident of Lund, like me) wrote a cute ballad that tells the story and finishes on the ironic twist that as Finn turned to stone, he uttered a spell that the church would never be 100% finished: this is why the cathedral will always be under repair or rebuilding in some corner! Tegnér couldn't know how right he would be; in his day the big restorations of the late 19th century had not yet got under way. But it's true that the building and its environments are still the subject of steady minor repairs or discussions on future repair or adaptation.Strausszek 13.52 CET 06 April 2008

I tried to eliminate a few inconsistencies which worried me while reading this useful summary. One thing was the spelling of archbishops' names - Danish from Danish sources, Swedish from Swedish sources, as might be expected. So which form should be used, Asser or Ascer, Gunnersen or Gunnarsen? I opted for the Danish version up to 1658, when the cathedral was Danish, Swedish thereafter. However, it doesn't really matter as long as the same version is used throughout the article. There are similar inconsistencies in the List of Bishops of Lund elsewhere in Wikipedia, where Ascer (Swedish) and Gunnersen (Danish) appear. A source for the description of the present building seems to be the cathedral's home page - here there was a confusion in the translation/adaptation of the description of the gallery organ, which has 102 stops or registers, not "notes". Uttenthal, Salamanca —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.50.126.9 (talk) 13:51, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Foundation of Lund
The origin of Lund isn't clear. The article's statement that it was founded in 990 by Canute I, who was born some years before 1150, is clearly erroneous. Current consensus, as indicated in the Lund article, seems to be that Lund was founded around 990 at the present site of the village of Uppåkra, and later moved some 5 km by King Sweyn I Forkbeard to its present location. Ryttaren (talk) 18:53, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Bells
Someone without a user account keeps adding a section about bells. I hope you can read this message. Thank you for your contribution to the article, a commendable ambition. However, if you want to add information to the article, please make sure that a) it is supported by reliable sources, b) that it is in line with the Manual of Style guidelines and c) since this is an article rated Good article, make the addition in a way that is coherent with the rest of the article and proportionate with it. I will keep removing additions which are not supported by reliable sources. Yakikaki (talk) 12:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Recent edits - Bells
Two times the article has been edited to add a small bit of information about the Cathedral's bells. Since this is a Good article, it's important to ensure that content that is being added to an article is cited, that cited content is not removed, and that content is not added indiscriminately. I rolled back the edits here and here.

It would be wonderful to have more information about the bells. It would be better to not have a series of small sections. So if there's a way to incorporate the info in an existing section - or to had more than a sentence or two about the bells, that would be very nice.

Want help?–CaroleHenson (talk) 15:25, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Photo change
Regarding this edit, I like the new photo. I think it's more commanding than the initial photo. I wonder if we could add the previous photo to the body of the article.

It was added by an IP user with only one contribution, so I couldn't ping them.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:11, 1 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Perhaps to the Lund Cathedral section, either at the top or in the galley
 * Or, to the right of the last two paragraphs in Lund Cathedral?–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:20, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Lunds domkyrka augusti 2012.jpg
 * Have no clear preference. The old photo gives a nice overview of the proportions and layout of the cathedral (good), but has people in it (bad). The new photo looks nicer, but is concentrated on the westwork. Many other wikis had chosen the "added" photo or equivalent to the lead. Note that if you do not mind few people and street signs, there are also other options that emphasize the westwork without hiding the rest of the cathedral, see "another proposal" photo. That said, if you have a strong preference for the "added" photo, just revert my reversal. Викидим (talk) 20:10, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I prefer the original or "another proposal". The one with the towers and west facade shows considerably less of the church (and one of the most historically recent parts). Yakikaki (talk) 20:34, 1 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Okay.


 * I like "another proposal" - it is commanding and is more inclusive. It looks really nice, too, set against the bright blue sky. Lovely!–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)


 * ✅, it sounds like that works for all of us. It's really nice.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:17, 1 May 2024 (UTC)